Re: [groovy-dev] avoid println in tests ?
Good idea; fancy having a go :)
For Groovy tests we derive from GroovyTestCase and println will use the
'out' property to write to; so we could just set that to be a
StringWriter maybe?
On 3 Feb 2005, at 20:41, Bruce Chapman wrote:
> A Crazy idea.
>
> Hack the test framework so...
>
> Before each test, set System.out to be a new PrintWriter(new
> CharArrayWriter())
>
> IF the test passes, discard the System.out stuff
>
> IF the test fails, then send the CharArrayWriter buffer to the regular
> System.out. (and thence to the reports)
>
>
> Result: No printlns muddying the test report, EXCEPT for the tests
> that fail
> (in which case printlns might actually be useful to someone)
>
> Bruce
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dierk Koenig [mailto:dierk.koenig@...]
> Sent: Thursday, 3 February 2005 11:22 p.m.
> To: dev@...
> Subject: RE: [groovy-dev] avoid println in tests ?
>
> they are already rerouted to the test-report files,
> which essentially means, the mess is somewhere else 
>
> sure, it would help a little, to separate at least
> the system.outs of the framework from those of the
> tests. (not sure, how to achieve this)
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jastrachan@... [mailto:jastrachan@...]
>> Sent: Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2005 19:33
>> To: dev@...
>> Subject: Re: [groovy-dev] avoid println in tests ?
>>
>>
>> Could we maybe pipe the output of println to somewhere else, so you
>> can
>> see the test report with what worked/didn't and not have to wade
>> through the output?
>>
>>
>> On 2 Feb 2005, at 18:27, Dierk Koenig wrote:
>>> Hiall,
>>>
>>> browsing through the current test suite and using the
>>> test reports I noticed that there are numerous
>>> println statements.
>>> Those printlines make the reports more difficult to read
>>> than they should be.
>>> They also do not add much to the expressiveness of the
>>> tests as they do not reveal what is expected.
>>>
>>> I'd like to propose the general rule to avoid
>>> output to System.out in test cases.
>>>
>>> The current changes we need to apply to the
>>> existing test suite may offer the opportunity
>>> to get rid of this "test smell".
>>>
>>> Any comments?
>>>
>>> Mittie
>>>
>>>
>>
>> James
>> -------
>> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>>
>
>
>
>
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
RSS Feed